The family friendly console developer is the first to release a game that receives an R18+ rating. This is the very definition of irony.

There is absolutely no irony here
I have no idea what makes R18+ different from MA, but I have to assume that this is not the first game deserving of R18+ rating. And so, the family-friendly developer is the first one to mark a mature game as such.

I suspected this might happen, i suppose now the wowsers will get their way, MA15+ games will now be rated R18+. But i suppose because there won't be any mass shooting sprees in Australia in the near future, or medium future, then it must have been a success! [/stupidity]

But this is exactly what the advocates of the R18+ rating system promised would happen. They said that this would actually be better for the children because there were games being misrated because they no alternative. This is not an unforseen consequence or the wowsers being proven right.

Firstly, our gun control laws have prevented massacres, not banning games or movies, secondly the "wowsers" have no influence on the ratings board.

The reason why there was no R18+ before was because an Attorney-General (Michael Atkinson) was being influenced by the wowsers. The lack of an R18+ rating, not the wowsers, is the reason so many games were refused classification or modified for Australian audiences.

I just think its sad that Australians have been treated like infants so long by their politicians...why did they put up with that shit? As a parent just give me the same kind of info they give for a TV program "This game contains scenes of (insert violence, sex, drug references, whatever)" and let ME decide what is and is not appropriate for my boys. Its called parenting and just because some are too fucking lazy to do their damned jobs as parents does NOT mean that as an adult I shouldn't be able to play whatever kind of game that I want.

I might be missing something, but how does rating a game (or movie or whatever) as "18" impact on the ability of adults to watch it? It doesn't even stop parents letting their kids play/view it in their own home if they want to. It just means that children are limited in their ability to access adult-rated material off their own bat.

The point was the games were BANNED in all of Australia before, just as you can't get the walking dead game in Germany now because you aren't allowed to kill anything human in a game there, they label killing zombies as desecration of a corpse. At least the Germans do have a bit of an excuse, what with them causing the deaths of millions and all, Australia was nothing but big brother deciding what the peasants could and could witness.

Australia, it's a democracy, if the majority were concerned enough as adults to alter censorship in Australia they would. If a few immature people whine about it, well, the majority ignore them. Ton of games out there, now to many to play, so what if some are cut out for gratuitous scenes that have nothing to do with game play and often screw it up in there purely for notoriety and to feed the most immature ignorant players. Want to change the rules, then show some maturity and seek political change, becom

I welcome the R rating; adults should be able to play any game they want.

I'm also an Australian parent of game-enthusiast children, and I share the problem with the rating system which assumes that all kids and all families are the same. The coarse measure of a "rating" is often unhelpful, especially if your kids are at those "in-between" ages where some material would be okay and others would not.

My kids have been going to art galleries since before they could walk. They fully know what a human without clo

I just think its sad that Australians have been treated like infants so long by their politicians...why did they put up with that shit?

Because you're imagining it. We tend to ignore with things foreigners imagine are happening in Australia mate.

As a parent just give me the same kind of info they give for a TV program "This game contains scenes of (insert violence, sex, drug references, whatever)" and let ME decide what is and is not appropriate for my boys.

I have no idea what makes R18+ different from MA, but I have to assume that this is not the first game deserving of R18+ rating.

It exists. That's what makes it different. Games which don't fit within a rating system get refused classification in Australia which means they are banned from retail sale. Every banned game thus far is perfectly fine under an R18+ system.

I don't know. I usually equate doing something ironic with negativity, as if Nintendo was being hypocritical. You forget (or ignore) that when 2 people get married, they become a family. There does not need to be kids. And the saying "Fun for all the family!" should also include people over the age of 18, otherwise it's just "Fun for the younger children!"

"incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result."

So in this case, of all the publishers, Nintendo is the last you'd expect to apply for this rating exactly because they're known for their family-friendly games (implying they wouldn't need 18+ ratings) , hence the irony.

I don't think there's any ambiguity to the term "fun for the family". Regardless of what may constitute a family I think it's very well understood that when people and companies use that expression they mean children.

There are also parents who think it's okay to expose their kids to anything and everything; people have differing opinions and degrees of responsibility. Usually, but certainly not always, the point of a term is to help offer some degree of specificity.

I don't know. I usually equate doing something ironic with negativity, as if Nintendo was being hypocritical. You forget (or ignore) that when 2 people get married, they become a family. There does not need to be kids. And the saying "Fun for all the family!" should also include people over the age of 18, otherwise it's just "Fun for the younger children!"

The average age of console gamers is over 18.

Ah, but Nintendo is generally viewed as a "family friendly" console where "family" means "with kids".

And no, irony isn't negative. Irony is generally more humorous than anything else.

That really depends on the point of view. Observers think it funny, but the subject of the wisecrack may not. A lot of people mistake irony for hypocrisy. For example: When talking about an anti-alcohol advocate who's found drunk in a bar, the emphasis is on making fun at the expense of the hypercritical advocate.

So the inference is that Nintendo is doing something bad, by apparently not sticking to their morals of being a child-friendly games company, whereas it's irrelevant as you can't expect them to nev

Or, irony will be that kids want to get their hands on this game now . . . just because it has an R18+ rating. Doing anything that is illegal or a sin is more fun. Like, sex before you are married, sneaking into a movie with an adult rating, buying beer when you are under aged, etc.

The R18+ sticker is a big red, blinking "Buy Me!" sticker on the box for kids.

Or, irony will be that kids want to get their hands on this game now . . . just because it has an R18+ rating. Doing anything that is illegal or a sin is more fun. Like, sex before you are married, sneaking into a movie with an adult rating, buying beer when you are under aged, etc.

The R18+ sticker is a big red, blinking "Buy Me!" sticker on the box for kids.

Like supplying alcohol to a minor, I assume there are enforceable penalties for supplying a minor with an R18+ game (it's my country, but i'm too lazy to rtfa).

Still... it's not the publishers problem if an outlet sells a game to a minor. They still get the money, which is more than the nothing they would have received if the kid had just downloaded the game instead (which they probably will anyway).

Or, irony will be that kids want to get their hands on this game now . . . just because it has an R18+ rating. Doing anything that is illegal or a sin is more fun. Like, sex before you are married, sneaking into a movie with an adult rating, buying beer when you are under aged, etc.

The R18+ sticker is a big red, blinking "Buy Me!" sticker on the box for kids.

Like supplying alcohol to a minor, I assume there are enforceable penalties for supplying a minor with an R18+ game (it's my country, but i'm too lazy to rtfa).

The key word is selling, not supplying.

It's illegal to sell alcohol to a minor, but if a parent gives alcohol to a minor they haven't commited an offence. It's the same with R18 (we've had this rating on movies, books and music for years) It's illegal to sell R18 material to someone under 18, but if their parents buy it there's no problem.

Or, irony will be that kids want to get their hands on this game now . . . just because it has an R18+ rating. Doing anything that is illegal or a sin is more fun. Like, sex before you are married, sneaking into a movie with an adult rating, buying beer when you are under aged, etc.

The R18+ sticker is a big red, blinking "Buy Me!" sticker on the box for kids.

Like supplying alcohol to a minor, I assume there are enforceable penalties for supplying a minor with an R18+ game (it's my country, but i'm too lazy to rtfa).

The key word is selling, not supplying.

It's illegal to sell alcohol to a minor, but if a parent gives alcohol to a minor they haven't commited an offence. It's the same with R18 (we've had this rating on movies, books and music for years) It's illegal to sell R18 material to someone under 18, but if their parents buy it there's no problem.

You've isolated the case where a parent gives their own child alcohol, but that's the exception. If you are under age and get someone else to buy alcohol for you, they can be done for supplying alcohol to a minor. Whether you pay them to do it or just ask really really nicely, the key word is still supply.

Nope. Or at least in Victoria. You give an 8yo alcohol and see what you get charged with when the parents find out. Whether the 8yo paid you money (selling) or you gave it to them for free won't make a significant amount of difference.

There are exceptions allowing a parent to supply alcohol to a minor, or others to supply alcohol to a minor with the parents permission, but that is an exception.

Verse 1
*Ahem*
Mi mi mi mi miiiiiiiii
I am the great mighty poo [youtube.com],
and I'm going to throw my shit at you!
A huge supply of tish,
comes from my chocolate starfish.
How about some scat you little twat?

Verse 2
Do you really think you'll survive in here?
You don't seem to know which creek you're in.
Sweet corn is the only thing,
that makes it through my rear.
How do you think I keep this lovely grin?
*ting*
Spoken: Have some more caviar.

"Twenty-three products have been given the AO rating without revision for a different rating. Peak Entertainment Casinos was rated AO for unsimulated online gambling. Two were given for violence, as aforementioned. The remaining 20 AO games were given rated thus for sexual content or nudity."

But it's developed by Team Ninja, which isn't exactly family friendly. They do Dead or alive, Ninja Gaiden, and Metroid other M. I'm at work, so I can't link to any images of "Dead or Alive Xtreme beach volleyball."

I guess Australia follows the US's ridiculous morality of "Bloody decapitation is okay, a thong bikini is not." (sigh)

While the sex is worse than violence mentality is real, and generally ridiculous. It seems that most people who criticize it don't understand that there is a reasonable premise that it stems from. First, violence is something that is a natural urge pretty much from the point that a child is physically capable of exhibiting it. It is ingrained in our dna. Whereas sex is an urge that generally starts really kicking in at puberty. Thus, if exposed to other small children, violence is already a part of the

I've been drinking, watching porn, playing games long before I was 18.
I have a Job, house, kid, pay my bills and cry myself to sleep at night like the rest of the world. Put the age to 40 and give people something to look forward to..

I doubt you would be *drinking* illegally, it's the ones giving you access that would be at fault (and not many countries in the world make it illegal when you are in your own home drinking your parent's whiskey).

If you're under 21 and at a party drinking alcohol you are a minor in possession, which is against the law in the US.Nearly everyone drinks before 21, as a point of reference I was home-schooled by fundamentalist Christians, wasn't a particularly wild child, and I still was drinking (illegally) long before 21.

Sure, but a party is not your own home, so either it's a public place and that would be illegal yes or at another private residence and how would you've gotten your hands on alcohol legally there? The owners aren't allowed to give it to you and you can't have brought it yourself. But in you own home you could legally drink. (At least that is how I understood US drinking laws)

In your own home, with your parents present you are allowed to drink with their permission. However I've never known anyone who drank even primarily in such a fashion, let alone exclusively.By far the most common form of alcohol consumption as a teenager in the US is binge drinking at a party: http://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/underage-drinking.htm [cdc.gov]

It's hard for me to believe that possessing/drinking alcohol as under 18/21 isn't illegal. That would leave a loophole that it would be ok for them to brew their own (unless there's another law which forbids brewing as under 18/21) & drink it.

By far the most common form of alcohol consumption as a teenager in the US is binge drinking at a party [...]

According to this "fact sheet", that's where most alcohol is consumed by teenagers. That doesn't mean that most under-21s who consume alcohol binge drink, or do so at a party. I believe that it's "the most common form of alcohol" per volume of alcohol, but I'd need to see more evidence as to whether or not it's the most common form per capita.

I just want to remind / point out to anyone reading here that alcohol is a 'drug', and it is a dangerous one. It just happens to be a legal drug. There are good reasons for these laws that prohibit young people from using alcohol. It ruins more lives than illegal drugs.

That's not actually true everywhere in the US. This map [wikipedia.org] (from this article [wikipedia.org] on Wikipedia) summarizes the laws by state. My understanding of the map is that parents may not serve their children alcohol in the the states colored yellow. Yes, United States drinking laws are ridiculous.

You don't know what country or US state AC resides in. In the US, even though the feds wormed their way into the States' business and coerced them all to raising the minimum age for purchasing alcohol and consuming it in public to 21 through legislation passed in 1985, there are still details which vary from state to state. Fifteen states and the District of Columbia ban underage consumption in ANY setting, even residences in family settings. Eighteen states do not ban underage CONSUMPTION at all, and the remaining seventeen states do not ban underage consumption at home.

Not necessarily true. It varies state by state, but some places only restrict the sale of alcohol to minors, not the consumption. For example, it may be perfectly legal for a parent to give their child a beer.

When opening this article I half expected to read about the next installment of Grand Theft Auto or some other title riddled with adult themes.

The next GTA game will be rated G and will consist of Postman Pat going on his deliveries... until the unlock code is released.

I think the game Carmageddon did something like that. In some countries it was deemed that running people down with your car wasn't really the right thing to do so the game was released with zombies instead of people (s/skintone/green). For countries that deemed that running down zombies wasn't tasteful enough, the zombies were changed to robots. It was supposedly very easy to take

Now that everything settled, does that mean we're clear for a localization of the latest Futanari-Tentacle-Ahegao-Neotare-BDSM nukige from Japan?'Cause "The Maiden Rape Assault: Violent Semen Inferno" just doesn't do it for me anymore.

This is a good thing. By all accounts, the game is awful. However, it is also squarely the kind of game that wouldn't have been given a 15 rating under the old system (and hence would have been denied release). So it's an indication that the new 18 rating is an actual 18 rating, rather than an excuse to just mark games that would previously have been 15s even more harshly, while still keeping many games out of the country.

I mean, it presents the child with the possibility of full-scale dismemberment! You can even stack heads for trophies, make hellish contraptions like cybernetic walking thrones and lawns full of torsos reaching for the sky lamenting their painful existence as ornaments keeping the repoman claiming his shiny, transparent and flat one-blocks.

You can already get into serious trouble in many or most areas carrying an obviously toy gun in school, and there have even been cases of persecuting children for making a sign of a gun with their hand, or drawing a PICTURE of a gun. Coming next: outlawing THOUGHTS of violence.

It is only the logical final step that we end up in the Firefly universe through extending social engineering to actual physical or chemical monkeying with human brains. Oh wait, we are already there, with psychotropic drugs [wordpress.com] being handed out like candy to children.

This would all have been universally considered crazy by any previous generation. It still is considered crazy by rational people.

Perhaps this is a new marketing plan? First, make it unobtainable by those that _really_ want to play it, add some more media hype with the rating system to make it even more desirable, and then hope that they eventually buy a legal copy once they are old enough to do so. Might work... well sort of. If they have a bootleg copy while under 18 they can't admit to having it, but when they are of legal age its still bootleg, so they might have to buy it so they can share with their younger friends. Somehow this doesn't sound like the rating system is doing its job, and the first game probably hasn't even hit the market yet.

Ninja Gaiden 1 or 2 would have been a very different conversation. The way I see it, the Aussies found a way to rack up a symbolic victory to look good to hyper-sensitive parents without actually hamstringing a blockbuster game.